Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1887-11-12
its designs of liberality without further

its designs of liberality without further
burdening the Government
Another stanch supporter of the bill was
Mr.. Price, of Iowa, who expressed himself as
to the purpose of the bill and the necessity
for it. Among other things he said (Con.
Globe. 1st Sess., 3sth Cong, p. 1883:
The original bill was passed for the purpose of
the construction of Pacific railroad. At the
time of its passage It was the impression that
the amount of the Government subsidy was
sufficient to build that road. need not say to
the House that since the passage of that law
the prices of labor and material have gone up
from 90 to 100 per cent, and that an amount Of
Government .ubsidy amply sufficient to con-
struct the read at that time is insufficient and
inadequate at this time
In reference TO carrying the troops of the
Government need only say that the bi con-
templates, and, If / am not mistaken, specifies
In terms that the company shall carry the
troops and munitions of war for the Government
at all times when called upon to do so and the
compensation for doing SO shall be credited to
the company on the loan the Government
makes in these bonds. If i am not right in
this this is the time and place to correct me.
1t proposes nothing new in reference to that. 1t
leaves that matter. as | understand is, Just
where it was before, and, as matter of course,
II 1t was right at the time 1t was passed, 1t can
not be wrong now.
The gentleman was mistaken, however,
as to the part that the bill made no change
in the existing law in the particular men
toned, since it required only one-half of
the compensation for Government trans
portation to be applied on the bonds
There were other members of the House,
as for instance, Mr.. Steele, of New York,
who further showed by their remarks the
spirit ofgenerosity and forbearance towards
the companies which led to the amendment
of 1864. We forbear, however, to quote
these remarks. Con. Globe, LIST Sess.. 3Sth
Cong, p. 3022.
With respect to the Government trans
portation there was an attempt by Mr. Hol-
man, OF Indiana, the great " obiector," to
amend the bill SO as torequire it to be done
by the companies free of charge, but the
amendment failed. 1t is clear, we think,
both from the Act of 1864 and from the de-
bates, that there was no intent on the part
OF Congress, any more than there was upon
the part of the previous Congress, TO
impose upon the companies the harsh
exaction of requiring payment of the
bonds absolutely, or in any other
way than in services, etc. ANY such
imperative requirement would have de-
feated the purpose of the bill then. even
more surely than it would have defeated
the Act of 1862. Instead of greater strin-
gency in that particular, the new bill was
even more favorable to the company than
the Old in requiring only half of the cost
of Government transportation to be credited
on the bonds. As Senator Stanford saws,
in his answer to the interrogatories of the
Pacific Railway Commission. it was the
expectation that half the compensation
would be sufficient, with the five per cent,
to pay off the bonds. In this discussion OF
the proceedings of Congress in 1864 we
have said nothing of the debates in the
Senate. That body passed at first bill OF
an entirely different character, guarantee
ing the interest on double the amount OF
bonds provided for in the Act of 1862. II
was compelled, however, to yield its bill
in favor of the House bill on q conference
There was no debate of any consequence
in the Senate on the House bill
To sum up our remarks on the legisla.
ton of 1864, we NAV say that if Congress
could then afford TO be generous in its deal.
ings with the railroad companies it can
much more afford it now. That bill, too
was passed at very critical time tor the
under debate the bloody battles of the Viii.
derness were fought, and the assault upon
Petersburg was repulsed with great slaugh.
ter. Grant was fighting it out on that
line" but every foot of his progress was
marked with the blood of the brayest and
best of the soldiers of the Union. The
land was shrouded in gloom, and there wa:
mourning in thousands of Northern homes
The nation. confided in Grants logged de-
termination to win, but it knew not how
fearful the cost might yet be. And yet
with all the other demands upon its re-
sources, it could afford still to urge on The
construction of the Pacific Railroad, and Il
be more liberal even than in 1862 ia its di
a, $50 l.
ing. A similar spirit in treating with the
companies would well become the nation
now in the time of its prosperity, especially
when generosity TO the companies is sim
ply bare justice to the people of this coast
who must eventually pay this debt, or the
greater proportion of it, if payment should
be required.
If the spirit of lberality and fair dealing
which uniformly characterized the treat
ment of the Central and Union Pacific
Railroad Companies by the General Govern
ment down to 1864, and later, had contin.
ued to control Congress and the executive
department, the companies would have
unQuestionably been able to paw theil
debt to the Government long before its ma
turity. But such has not been the case
On the contrary, harshness and vigorous
severity have been conspicuously manifest
of late in all Government dealings with
these companies. The Thurman Act oil
1878 for instance, was most adverse to the
companies and through them to their pa.
irons. 1t could scarcely have been more
so if it had been intended out of mere NAL.
evidence TO injure the companies. Nor has
it resulted III any corresponding benefit
to the country at large. In violation
of the solemn and express provisions
of the Act of 1864, the Government under
the Thurman Act, withholds the entire
compensation due the companies for Gov
eminent transportation. 1t compels them
also to pay over sufficient amount annu-
ally. beyond the cost of the Government
transportation, and the per cent of net
earnings, to make 25 per cent of the net
earnings to constitute the sinking fund >
provided for in the Act. And it is a "sink-
ing fund" with vengeance. 1t is sinking
the money of the companies every year be-
yond hope of recovery. 1t is, under the
provisions of the Act, invested in United
States bonds at premium, in such way
as to make the amount which will ulti-
mately be available to pay the debt of the
companies less than the amount actually
paid in by the companies. As Senator
Stanford shows in his answer to the
Pacific Railway Investigating Commits
sion, the Central Pacific Company has
already lost S1,612, 1856 ~ by the sink
ing fund investments under that Act.
Tie Executive Department of the Gov
eminent has been equally exactipg and
ungenerous in its treatment of the compa-
MES. 1t has, without any warrant of law,
withheld not only the compensation due
the companies for Government transporta-
ton over the aided lines, but also for SINH
lar transportation over other unaided lines
leased to those companies. 1t has now in
its hands, derived from this source, 81 $751;
1913 10, which the Supreme Court has SOL
EMMY adjudged belongs to the Central Pa
cific Company. In addition to this, reason
able rates of compensation for Government
transportation have been persistently de-
MED to the companies. For instance, as
shown in Senator Stanfords answer above
mentioned, tie compensation allowed by
the Postoffice Department to these compa-
niles has been fixed at the same rates al
lowed to roads constructed at little cost
through populous districts, furnishing an
abundance of local traffic to sustain the
roads and make them remunerative. In
deed, the whole course of the recent deal
ings of the Government with these compa-
MES has been, in its results, as hostile and
injurious to the compar les as if it had de-
liberately intended to cripple them in their
resources and to render it impossible for
them to discharge their debt.